(Burlington) Vermont city takes step toward banning assault rifles

Source: CNN

A resolution passed in the most populous city in Vermont could lead to a ban on assault rifles and high-capacity magazines.

Burlington's City Council members voted 10-3 in favor of the resolution. City Councilor Norm Blais, a Democrat, said he was moved to sponsor the proposal after hearing what he called President Barack Obama's pleas to have a discussion about weapons in our country after the deadly Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings in Newtown, Connecticut, in December.

Next, the resolution has to be presented in public hearings, voted on by the public and be approved by the state legislature before it becomes city law.

Blais said his city wasn't nearly as safe as people thought, saying that "if somebody was not a convicted felon and was walking through our thoroughfare and had an AK-47 slung over his shoulder, there's nothing we could do about that. Most people are surprised to hear that."

1. I doubt it will happen

When it comes to guns, Vermonters- even Burlintonians- are pretty rabid. The dems have a supermajority in both houses and we have a progressive gov, but I'd bet almost anything that most of them will not support this reasonable proposal.

2. And the push is for pistols not assault rifles

As late as the 1960s, pistols made up only about 10% of the firearm market in the US, today it is 40% and climbing. Assault weapons have seen a similar increase, but where near the increase in pistols sales.

95% of all murders involving firearms, involve pistols, in fact the number of murders Nationally contributed to rifles and shotguns (which not only includes assault weapons but ALL rifles) are less then the number of people killed with knives or "blunt instruments" i.e clubs and other objects people are hit with.

Now, Newtown is an huge exception to the above, the shooter used an assault weapon, a semi-automatic version of the AR-15 (M-16) rifle. Worse he knew how to use it (unlike the Colorado Movie Killer, who did not and thus the weapon jammed on him). His targets were in a situation where they were easy targets. It is just a terrible situation, but bad examples often lead to bad law. We have to remember that the problem is NOT assault weapons but pistols, for it is with pistols most people are killed with, not rifles.

The problem is given a choice between the two, pistols or assault weapons, the makers of both prefer a ban on assault weapons, for the same reason they supported the ban on automatic weapons in 1986, they know they can work around the restrictions as to assault rifles and retain most of that market, but if pistols are banned (or restricted) then 40% of the total firearm market is gone. Thus I expect increase restrictions on Assault Weapons (probably a more then five round detachable magazine ban) but no restrictions as to pistols. It would be a ban that would be worthless, for it would have NO effect on the weapon actually killing Americans, Pistols, but sound like it is.

Side note: I am using the term "Assault Weapon" to mean semi-automatic rifles that operate with a operation system like an AR-15 (or M-16) or an AK-47 or other similar semi-automatic only weapons. I know the "precise" definition of an "Assault Rifle" includes the ability to fire in the automatic mode, and as such illegal to make new ones for the civilian market since 1986 and that the weapons used do NOT meant that definition, but the term "assault Weapon" is now a common term in usage and means any semi-automatic only weapon that looks like and operate like a true Assault Rifle so do NOT object to the use of the term "Assault Weapon" unless you can come up with a better TERM for the same object THAT is as widely used for the same object.